Cargando…

Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models

BACKGROUND: Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models provide useful insights into critical issues to inform the development of new cost effectiveness models in the same disease area. Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe a comparative analysis of cost-effectiveness...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rautenberg, T. A., George, G., Bwana, M. B., Moosa, M. S., Pillay, S., McCluskey, S. M., Aturinda, I., Ard, K., Muyindike, W., Moodley, P., Brijkumar, J., Johnson, B. A., Gandhi, R. T., Sunpath, H., Marconi, V. C., Siedner, M. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7105898/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31835974
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2019.1705314
_version_ 1783512499167952896
author Rautenberg, T. A.
George, G.
Bwana, M. B.
Moosa, M. S.
Pillay, S.
McCluskey, S. M.
Aturinda, I.
Ard, K.
Muyindike, W.
Moodley, P.
Brijkumar, J.
Johnson, B. A.
Gandhi, R. T.
Sunpath, H.
Marconi, V. C.
Siedner, M. J.
author_facet Rautenberg, T. A.
George, G.
Bwana, M. B.
Moosa, M. S.
Pillay, S.
McCluskey, S. M.
Aturinda, I.
Ard, K.
Muyindike, W.
Moodley, P.
Brijkumar, J.
Johnson, B. A.
Gandhi, R. T.
Sunpath, H.
Marconi, V. C.
Siedner, M. J.
author_sort Rautenberg, T. A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models provide useful insights into critical issues to inform the development of new cost effectiveness models in the same disease area. Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe a comparative analysis of cost-effectiveness models and highlight the importance of such work in informing development of new models. This research uses genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing after first line treatment failure for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) as an example. METHOD: A literature search was performed, and published cost effectiveness models were selected according to predetermined eligibility criteria. A comprehensive comparative analysis was undertaken for all aspects of the models. RESULTS: Five published models were compared, and several critical issues were identified for consider- ation when developing a new model. These include the comparator, time horizon and scope of the model. In addition, the composite effect of drug resistance prevalence, antiretroviral therapy efficacy, test performance and the proportion of patients switching to second-line ART potentially have a meas- urable effect on model results. When considering CD4 count and viral load, dichotomizing patients according to higher cost and lower quality of life (AIDS) versus lower cost and higher quality of life (non-AIDS) status will potentially capture differences between resistance testing and other strategies, which could be confirmed by cross-validation/convergent validation. A quality adjusted life year is an essential outcome which should be explicitly explored in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: Using an example of GART for HIV, this study demonstrates comparative analysis of pre- viously published cost effectiveness models yields critical information which can be used to inform the structure and specifications of new models.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7105898
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71058982021-03-01 Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models Rautenberg, T. A. George, G. Bwana, M. B. Moosa, M. S. Pillay, S. McCluskey, S. M. Aturinda, I. Ard, K. Muyindike, W. Moodley, P. Brijkumar, J. Johnson, B. A. Gandhi, R. T. Sunpath, H. Marconi, V. C. Siedner, M. J. J Med Econ Article BACKGROUND: Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models provide useful insights into critical issues to inform the development of new cost effectiveness models in the same disease area. Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe a comparative analysis of cost-effectiveness models and highlight the importance of such work in informing development of new models. This research uses genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing after first line treatment failure for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) as an example. METHOD: A literature search was performed, and published cost effectiveness models were selected according to predetermined eligibility criteria. A comprehensive comparative analysis was undertaken for all aspects of the models. RESULTS: Five published models were compared, and several critical issues were identified for consider- ation when developing a new model. These include the comparator, time horizon and scope of the model. In addition, the composite effect of drug resistance prevalence, antiretroviral therapy efficacy, test performance and the proportion of patients switching to second-line ART potentially have a meas- urable effect on model results. When considering CD4 count and viral load, dichotomizing patients according to higher cost and lower quality of life (AIDS) versus lower cost and higher quality of life (non-AIDS) status will potentially capture differences between resistance testing and other strategies, which could be confirmed by cross-validation/convergent validation. A quality adjusted life year is an essential outcome which should be explicitly explored in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: Using an example of GART for HIV, this study demonstrates comparative analysis of pre- viously published cost effectiveness models yields critical information which can be used to inform the structure and specifications of new models. 2020-01-11 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7105898/ /pubmed/31835974 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2019.1705314 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. www.tandfonline.com/ijme (http://www.tandfonline.com/ijme)
spellingShingle Article
Rautenberg, T. A.
George, G.
Bwana, M. B.
Moosa, M. S.
Pillay, S.
McCluskey, S. M.
Aturinda, I.
Ard, K.
Muyindike, W.
Moodley, P.
Brijkumar, J.
Johnson, B. A.
Gandhi, R. T.
Sunpath, H.
Marconi, V. C.
Siedner, M. J.
Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title_full Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title_fullStr Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title_short Comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
title_sort comparative analyses of published cost effectiveness models highlight critical considerations which are useful to inform development of new models
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7105898/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31835974
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2019.1705314
work_keys_str_mv AT rautenbergta comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT georgeg comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT bwanamb comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT moosams comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT pillays comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT mccluskeysm comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT aturindai comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT ardk comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT muyindikew comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT moodleyp comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT brijkumarj comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT johnsonba comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT gandhirt comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT sunpathh comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT marconivc comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels
AT siednermj comparativeanalysesofpublishedcosteffectivenessmodelshighlightcriticalconsiderationswhichareusefultoinformdevelopmentofnewmodels